London Bombing Inquest May Prompt Emergency-Service, MI5 Changes

By James Lumley -
May 5, 2011

For survivors of the July 7, 2005,
suicide bombings on London, the most important result of a
coroner’s inquest may be recommendations for changes at
emergency-service and intelligence agencies, rather than the
ruling on the causes of death of 52 victims.

Almost six years after the first suicide attacks on
European soil, Lady Justice Heather Hallett is scheduled to
issue a verdict today. While she can only come to a limited
number of verdicts on the deaths: accident, suicide, unlawful
killing, lawful killing, industrial disease, or an “open
verdict” if there isn’t evidence to support the others, she has
the right to issue findings highlighting lessons that should be
learned. That is called a Rule 43 Report.

“It’s not the verdict at all,” that will contain the most
important information, said Clifford Tibber, a lawyer for the
families of seven victims. “It’s the rule 43 report. We have
asked the coroner to make 32 recommendations and we hope she
does.”

Three suicide bombers set off explosions on underground
trains in central London during the morning rush hour of July 7,
2005. An hour after the first explosions a fourth man set off a
bomb on a bus. The bombings, the deadliest attack on the U.K.
since World War II and Europe’s first suicide attack, were
carried out by four British-born Muslims of Pakistani origin led
by 30-year-old Mohammed Siddique Khan.

Underground Radio

Relatives’ recommendations as part of the inquest have
included improving radio communications on London’s Underground
transit system and changes to the way the secret service
assesses terror suspects.

Hallett, who held the inquest without a jury as is common
in the U.K., has been considering her verdict since the review
closed March 13. She took evidence from 309 witnesses during 75
days of hearings spread over five-and-a-half months, according
to the website for the coroner’s probe. That included evidence
from survivors, rescuers, members of the emergency services, the
police, London transport workers and a representative of MI5,
the U.K.’s intelligence and security agency.

Hallett’s report is “exactly” what people are waiting
for, said James Carlton, a lawyer for 10 victim families. “My
families are pleased the inquest has ended. They are looking
forward to Dame Heather’s verdict and are ultimately hoping she
will consider very carefully the Rule 43 submissions.”

56 Killed

In total 56 people were killed, including the bombers.
Seven died on a train at Aldgate station in East London, 26 died
on a train in the tunnel between King’s Cross and Russell Square
stations. Six died on a train at Edgware Road station and 13
died on a bus on Tavistock Square.

The attacks were “an act of merciless savagery,” Hugo
Keith, the lawyer who questioned witnesses on behalf of Hallett
said on the first day of the inquest, Oct. 11.

In February, the chief of staff for MI5 Director General
Jonathan Evans testified that British intelligence hadn’t had
prior knowledge of the attacks. The man, whose name wasn’t
revealed and who was referred to throughout the proceedings as
“witness G.,” agreed the service had “no inkling of what
would befall London” prior to the attacks.

Even so, under cross examination from Keith, witness G.
rejected assertions that there had been “significant
intelligence failings.”

Keith also told Hallett that poor radio communications
hampered the rescue operation and health and safety concerns had
led to members of the emergency services holding back from
entering the tunnels, while ambulances took as long as an hour
to get to the sites of the bombings.

Jargon-Laden

Hallett already made it clear to a senior fireman during
the hearings that, in her opinion, jargon-laden management speak
used by some emergency-service members was a cause for concern
because it may have hindered communication.

“Right, so if you turn up at a major incident and you say
‘I’m a crew manager. Don’t worry, a conference demountable unit
is on its way from a management resource center,’ what does that
tell the person from another agency?” she asked the assistant
commissioner of the London Fire Brigade.

“We have to communicate with people and we best
communicate by using plain English,” she said March 3. “Sorry
if that sounded like a rant, but everybody who has been here for
the last few months will know I have been building up to it.”